HRI Selections

HRI Featured Bloggers

Brisnet.com Tools

Vic Zast

From the perspective of being an owner, an industry pioneer in corporate sponsorship, a track president and fan, Vic Zast writes the "Destinations" column for The Blood-Horse. His five-star ratings of international events have shed light on racing in all corners of the globe - from England, Australia, Hong Kong, Dubai to Japan.

Vic is a regular contributor to MSNBC.com, a columnist for the Illinois Racing News and has written on racing for ESPN.com, National Public radio and The Age, Australia's leading daily.

Vic makes his home in Chicago and lives in Saratoga Springs in August.

Monthly Archives

Syndicate

Monday, March 21, 2011

(CHICAGO, IL – March 21, 2011) Very few stories by horse racing writers result in impromptu news teleconferences. But the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation, with the help of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, invited the media to a party line only hours after Joe Drape’s scathing exposé was published in Thursday’s New York Times.

Drape implicated the TRF in equine cruelty by declaring that the charity neglected to pay farmers on their contracts to oversee retired horses. His article’s headline – “Ex-Racehorses Starve as Charity Fails in Mission to Care for Them” - guaranteed that the piece would be flammable. If the need to maintain industry friendships doesn’t get in his path, the Eclipse Award-winning journalist could wind up winning a Pulitzer Prize with work of this fervor.

Readers are entitled to draw their own conclusions about what was written. But Drape wrote a news story, reported without editorial embellishment. He confirmed his objectivity by implication when calling in on the conference connection to ask Tom Ludt, the TRF’s chairman, and George Grayson, the group’s president, with which of his points they found fault. Although the three men expressed disagreement, the dialogue was cordial. Was there interest among others in that which was spoken? Hardly. Only four media representatives asked questions.

“The TRF – a national charitable organization – asked for our help,” said Eric Wing, Sr. Director of Media Relations, when asked to explain why the NTRA hosted the presentation. To most people, where the NTRA’s charter begins and what it includes are unclear. Nevertheless, it is good that the sport’s most effective news clearing house realizes that sweeping dirt under the rug will result in an untidy living room. “If an issue of national significance pops up, one that directly affects our members and one that requires timely action, then we’re happy to help out,” Wing remarked.

Drape’s provocations didn’t lay open the important question about who really should pay for keeping horses no longer productive alive, but they certainly prompted it. In most consumer businesses, the manufacturer accepts the return of products that don’t live up to their promise or funds the process with a markdown allowance or damages fee. Many people believe that the industry, even without a commissioner, could enact a requirement that holds breeders and owners accountable for providing the horses a racetrack afterlife.

“In the final analysis, racing has to decide what it’s going to do about this,” commented Michael Blowen, the founder of Old Friends, which cares for about only a tenth the number of horses in the care of the TRF, but maintains a roster of former stars such as Marquetry, Tinner’s Way, Gulch and Sunshine Forever. “It’s a solvable problem, and it doesn’t even take that much money,” Blowen argued. “We have horses here that have generated $75 million in their careers, and they have no Social Security and no 401-k. It’s the fans that are taking care of them,” he noted.

Blowen believes equine retirement homes should be supported by the industry in the same manner as waste management companies are supported by garbage producers. As for the TRF’s finances, Grayson acknowledged an operating budget of $2.7 million, explaining that five percent of a $7 million trust established upon the death of Paul Mellon represents 13 percent of the total. Given reasonable administrative costs, this amount seems sufficient to care for the 1000 horses on the TRF’s farms, although it didn’t appear adequate last year.

In regard to investigative ennui, there are several reasons that explain why many turf writers are indifferent to controversial issues. In the first place, there aren’t many outlets for horse racing news, let alone news that is costly and hard to gather. The beat isn't sweet any longer. A writer with talent and ambition will do better by investing his time eslewhere. The few turf writers still on the payrolls of magazines and newspapers are asked to wear several hats. Their employers give them little time and money to produce work on a topic deserving of little coverage. One is only as good in his job as his opportunity allows.

As for those who do choose the sport, the knack for knowing on which side of the bread you'll find butter is attained quickly. Many writers learn that the people they cover are also a source of psychic income. An invisible line’s often drawn that becomes hard to cross when a subject reflects poorly on the benefactors. Harboring a love for the sport that’s extraordinary, some writers become star struck with trainers and jockeys. In addition, it pays not to bite the hand that feeds you. There have been notable cases in which racetracks have punished an individual for following the requirements of his trade by denying him access, ignoring his calls, making him feel like an outcast or cutting him off from free coffee.

Lastly, because only trade members support the sport's media with ad money, pressure is placed on trade press editors by publishers to watch out for what’s being published. Even the most successful Internet sites, including the biggest aggregator, owe their existence to the racecourses, farms and betting sites. Publications that run articles that reflect poorly on customers often lose the support of those customers. Outlets such as the Times have a broad-based, diversified advertising base to compensate when revenues are held back in protest by advertisers offended by editorial content.

When stories like Drape's hit, the industry's shocked by their impact and candor. People bristle. They affect damage control. Ludt concluded the teleconference by exaggerating to Ron Mitchell of bloodhorse.com that the story might serve as a blessing. He intimated that the TRF was receiving new donations as a result of what Drape had written. If that is true, a reaction came quickly.

In any case, defending yourself from a negligence charge is a strange way to fund-raise. Come to think of it, relying solely on charity to care for the horses' retirement is strange.

Drape reported on Friday that the New York Attorney General’s Charities Bureau will review the complaints about fiscal irresponsibility and shoddy horse care that have been leveled against the TRF, a Saratoga Springs, NY institution. Wing will be pressed into duty again if the Bureau finds impropriety.

Vic Zast is on Facebook and Twitter. To learn about his most recent creative project, go to ourlongestdrive.com.

“There have been notable cases in which racetracks have punished an individual for following the requirements of his trade by denying him access, ignoring his calls, making him feel like an outcast or cutting him off from free coffee.”

I understand that you too must make a decision how to proceed in order to survive in this business, but the truth, and the industry, would be better served by your publishing all specific wrongful incidents of retaliation by individuals/entities that you are aware. One gets the impression from reading this statement that these cases are rare, when it is the rule, not the exception.

That is why, contrary to the themes of ridicule directed toward internet bloggers by bias turf writers, it is important to recognize the courage and honesty of internet comment providers, who are free to speak the truth without threat from industry power brokers. We don’t want free coffee, don’t want to converse with them on the telephone, and should be proud to be an outcast from a group of individuals who probably were aware of what Drape wrote, but did not have the guts to publish it themselves.

I lost all respect for the Daily Racing Form based on their refusal to publish anything about the H.A.N.A boycott of Santa Anita, and realized how naive I was in thinking they were a newspaper reporting on industry news, and wrote to them inquiring why and received no reply. The next day, however, Steven Crist did an article on “greyhounds.” Hope their new betting platform with “Xpressbet” is going well......

Mr. Zast wrote:
Many people believe that the industry, even without a commissioner, could enact a requirement that holds breeders and owners accountable for providing the horses a racetrack afterlife.
__________________________

I concur. There used to be a time when Tom Ainslie the author wrote about the racing public as the “$2 buck improvers of the breed”.

That is not the case today. The bettors are not responsible for improving the breed. The breeders are. If they are churning out on their factory line a parade of nickel claimers with low-shelf life then they are silently contributing to the problem.

Overbreeding is the root of the problem. The proliferation of slots-infused statebred programs create even more unwanted horses at the lower class levels. Racing states blessed with slots revenue should also be taking steps to help these horse rescue operations.

From the facts, it seems TRF has about $6 a day to spend on each of the horses in its care. According to Drape’s reporting, for which he provided a source, TRF asked caretaker farms to accept as little as $3 a day. That should make even Top Turf Teddy wonder about the price of coffee.

The unsettling fact is TRF, like almost all of the institutions in horse racing is poorly managed. Add in the continuing drug use allegations against some of the top trainers in the sport, the price gouging of regulators, strange rulings as seen in the high profile Life at Ten and Game On Dude decisions, the incestous relationship of high profile Internet news “aggregators”, and now the allegations by Joe Drape in the New York Times about the care received by retired race horses owned by TRF, and I wonder how racing can survive much longer. I used to gamble on the horses quite often and have myself “adopted” two race horses that currently live on my non-working farm.

Even if TRF is not one of them, there are many rescue organizations providing excellent care to thoroughbreds who have outlived there usefullness at the track. There is also a checkoff program provided by the Jockey Club that allow those registering foals to donate $25, $50, or $100 to Thouroughbred Charities Fund and the Thoughbred Retirement Fund. I have not seen any reporting anywhere about how many foal papers arrive at the Jockey Club with those donations. That might be an interesting follow up Mr. Zast.

The_Knight_Sky: I am not taking a position on Zast’s commentary. I, however, wish to reply to the comment you made: “If they are churning out on their factory line a parade of nickle claimers with low-shelf life ...”; this comment lacks credibility. No breeder knows if the next foal will race as a stake horse or as a nickle claimer.

The thoroughbreds having the blood of the above simply failed to run one or two seconds faster, that is all.

TTT: Yea, HRI and other websites have pulled the gag from my mouth. At last I, and many other horseplayers, can be heard (oh how I wish I had more knowledge and ability to write about the industry). For years and years the only hope I and others had to be heard was to write a letter to Daily Racing Form or to a turf writer at a newspaper - and we all know how successful we were to get published.

For years and years turf writers at Daily Racing Form and prominent newspapers had the ‘floor’; it was their commentary and opinions that held sway; and what did get published from outside of the NTWA (or is it NATW?) members was commentary by racetrack executives, wealthy thoroughbred owners, or prominent trainers.

I understand Mr. Wmcorrow -
I was referring to the low-end breeders whose are residing in states with horse racing propped up with slots revenue.

They are not breeding “the best with the best, and hoping for the best”. They’re simply breeding to make a living. It would be great if the breed actually got stronger and faster. But that’s not the case here. State-bred races in states such as New Mexico and Indiana require the breeding of more mediocrity in order to fill their race cards.

When these horses’ careers are over, there is not many willing take the responsibility. Not the breeder. Not the owner. Not the trainer. The lower spectrum of the sport will be where we find more horses and fewer people unable to take care of the horses for the rest of their lives. That’s when it becomes a problem.

I’m afraid that this is the issue that will kill the sport. Dog racing started dying the day that documentary showing dead dogs being tossed in the pick-up truck was aired. There just isn’t the money to take care of all these horses. Corners are going to be cut. Horse racing is losing political supporters everyday. These sick horses will cost more and more every year.

** Due to recent inappropriate salacious comments and personal attacks in our comment sections, we are now requiring users to register. It is a quick, one-time-only process requiring e-mail verification. The option to automatically login in future visits is incorporated into the new security measure.

We apologize for the minor inconvenience but felt it necessary to take this measure in the best interests of all our readers. Many thanks for your understanding, helpful suggestions, and loyal support. -- The HRI Management Team **

*** HorseRaceInsider will delete any comment that engages in personal attacks directed at anyone, uses foul language, or one made by an imposter using another’s name to express an opinion or comment.

HRI will not, however, edit or discourage those who, with intellectual honesty, disagree with HRI staffers or other readers. We also will not, as is done on some racing sites, edit disagreeable or negative commentary in the interests of commerce.